I always find it fascinating to understand people’s reactions to Chelsea. To understand which gardens won the various medals and awards, which were talked about most and who liked what.
I like to see where I fit within these views and to also look for any evolution over the years. I suppose it’s an ongoing desire to understand why we like some particular garden styles over others. To see what I can learn and apply in my own garden, with a bit of added interest in the psychology of it all. People never stop being interesting!
So, I thought I’d examine four ‘best’ gardens at Chelsea this year in a little more detail.
Best In Show: Horatio’s Garden
The official best in show – the one scored most highly by the judges – was Horatio’s Garden. I’m really happy this came out on top and for the publicity it generates for a fabulous charity putting world class gardens into NHS hospitals.
It’s a difficult brief – trying to make it hospital bed-friendly – but Charlotte Harris and Hugo Bugg did a tremendous job creating an intimate garden in the circumstances.
I loved the planting, which was soft, colourful yet gentle and with a good mix of textures without any jarring.
I think it perhaps just lacked a little innovation. It was brilliantly executed, but nothing new.
I imagine the hard landscaping picked up innovation points, however, the path surface having been developed using crushed waste aggregate and zero cement, with hidden joints to ensure a smooth finish for spinal patients.
Behind the scenes technical points which are harder for the average viewer to fully appreciate, but which will be brilliant for the end users.
People’s Choice Award: Myeloma UK
Chris Beardshaw’s ‘blocky’ design collected the people’s choice award this year. It’s interesting that comments on my earlier blog didn’t necessarily follow this school of thought. (Admittedly, a somewhat smaller sample size!)
It’s always hard to know if the people’s choice award is more a function of a successful social media campaign than evidence of a genuine most-favoured garden. Yet it almost certainly reflects a very popular garden.
I went to a talk by Chris at one of the Oxford colleges earlier this year and he personally has quite the following of middle-aged ladies! Perhaps his design niche maps well to the average Chelsea goer and voter for the award.
For me, I think my biggest issue with his garden was the extent of obvious manicuring. All Chelsea gardens are deadheaded to within an inch of their lives, but his just looked almost plastic, it was so perfect. No leaf of one plant was allowed to mingle even a millimetre into the foliage of the next plant and my love of nature reacts viscerally to this. Of course, a garden isn’t nature, by definition, but I want a bit of life in the plants, a bit of personality and character and serendipity. An immaculate garden that reads as a simplistic 2D design plan will never press my buttons emotionally, however perfectly executed.
Janna’s Favourite Garden: The Savills Garden
I’m not sure ‘Janna’s Favourite Garden’ counts for anything at all, but it’s possibly the first year I haven’t predicted and agreed with the official Best in Show. Which of course makes my brain want to explore the reasons why.
I did think some of the hard landscaping execution might be marked down. It didn’t affect my enjoyment of the garden, but might have affected the judging. But that didn’t tell me why this garden drew me back more than any other this year.
On Press Day you have the luxury of time and space to really engage with the gardens. Designers will often invite you into the garden itself and there is lots of chattering amongst us Garden Media Guild members and other industry figures as to what we think and what we’ve heard.
All of this is before the judging outcomes are known, and I think it significantly guides my own day one conclusions. In addition, you can’t help but be influenced by those gardens with a general buzz about them – on Press Day it’s very clear which gardens are attracting the most interest.
I would say Savills was one of the few most buzzy gardens, although much of the buzz came from the Michelin chef and his team foraging, preparing and delivering food to the large table of Chelsea pensioners within the design.
Along with the adorable Mark Gregory, its down-to-earth Yorkshire designer, this garden felt enormously authentic. It looked like a real garden, with climbers on the walls, vegetables in the beds and herbs in pots and for me this was hugely refreshing for Chelsea. With the Pensioners on site, it felt like it was truly giving back to society, far far from the idea of an ego-led vanity project.
It felt like a space for the good life – of growing at home and enjoying the fruits of those labours. Emotion is everything for me in a garden.
The Industry Favourite?: The Nurture Landscapes Garden
We’ve explored three ‘bests’ already. And yet my sense is the real ‘winner’ was a fourth garden: Sarah Price’s.
Sarah’s garden of Benton Irises was quite the masterpiece. Sarah’s work always feels unique and thoughtful; pushing the boundaries of garden design to the next level.
I loved the complexity of the planting – a really broad palette of plants contrasting bold evergreen trees with the most delicate flowering specimens.
This was the garden that seemed to take Instagram by storm. It was the garden that designers, professionals and professional followers of design effused over. It was the one people talked of as their favourite garden ever.
For me, there were exquisite pockets that I could have gazed at all day. The little pool of water reflecting twinkling white flowers was absolutely to die for.
But there were also pockets that jolted me out of this deeply contented state. I wrote before about some of the irises being the exact colour of dead, rotting petals. Obviously for many, this didn’t concern them, but there were patches of just too much of this colour for me.
And whilst I liked the variability in planting density, I found the pathways a bit overpowering – just too much bare, hard ground overall. Add to this the brick pillars, which looked a little ‘new-build’ in an otherwise oldie-worldie, faded design and there were enough elements to mean I couldn’t quite ‘get lost’ in this garden.
My gut feel is that Sarah was my favourite designer there – the most sophisticated, skilful and innovative of them all. She also just happens to be a very sweet, modest lady!
I wondered why I was at odds with other designers though, in terms of my overall favourite.
I guess it primarily comes down to a bit of subjective personal preference. We all have things that just do or don’t work for us. I’m not a brown person. I’ve always felt funny wearing brown; goodness knows why!
And add to that the pull of Mark Gregory’s ‘real’ garden: a space you could imagine at home, a space that produces and nourishes and perhaps those two factors alone – brownness and nourishingness – were enough to tip me in Mark’s direction this time.
If I look at the photos I collated to add to this post, it really says it all. I put all the photos I had of the four gardens together and then filtered them down until I couldn’t bear to remove any more. The numbers I ended up with, using that method was as follows:
Chris Beardshaw 3
Horatio’s 8
Sarah Price 10
Mark Gregory 11
Sometimes, numbers speak a thousand words: Chris Beardshaw’s didn’t really get off the starting blocks; Horatio’s I really liked, but it didn’t quite pull at my heartstrings; Sarah’s I adored parts of, but the brownness meant Mark’s nourishing garden just pipped it to the post.
Next year, perhaps I’ll do away with the deep soul-searching and simply add up my photos and draw my conclusions!
Janna Schreier Garden Design 
If there was an award for “Most Coveted Garden,” it would have certainly gone to Gregory’s Savills Garden. I loved it too and, in particular, thought it was much better in person than on TV. You hit the nail on the head with “a space for the good life,” as it is easy to imagine sharing many happy hours there with family and friends…or even just being alone with a million ideas in my head while puttering about.
Knowing the thought and energy that goes into every Chelsea Garden, it is hard to find fault, but I will say others did not have the same power to draw me in. Price’s garden was exquisitely beautiful and made my heart leap, but it didn’t engage my imagination in the same way; it wasn’t as relatable…and I think (to an extent) we need that from gardens.
In some ways, it is a shame that the gardens are judged, and that we feel the need to judge every garden we visit. There is value in simply looking at the world through someone else’s lens and learning not only about them and their medium of expression (in this case gardens), but also more about ourselves.
Many thanks and congratulations on a job well done to all those who had a hand in creating these amazing gardens! Fingers crossed I will be at Chelsea again next year.
It’s really lovely to hear the thoughts of somebody else who was there at the show. Now you’ve said it, I can see how the Savills garden might not have come alive so much on television (I don’t watch TV!). In real life though, it was quite a magnet for me. Really interesting to hear your thoughts on Sarah Price’s garden. I’m not sure I’ve ever really thought of Chelsea gardens as ‘real’ – not things that I might have at home…until Mark Gregory’s this year. Perhaps that relatability is more important to me than I had realised. And interesting what you say about the judging. It probably feels a little different to me, as I see all the gardens before they have any label, or award, marked on them. You are right, it is nice to just view them for what they are, without having been told whether they are good or not! Perhaps the designers need the incentive of a ‘Gold’ to fire them up though? Hope you do get to Chelsea again next year – it’s a wonderful experience for people like us!
Horatio’s garden – a wonderful example of a garden committed to horticultural therapy in a hospital setting. The garden speaks for itself though, over and above that. Great planting scheme and yes the wide paths wouldn’t suit a domestic garden, usually, (unless you were wheel chair bound) but perfect for the purpose it was created.
I agree with you that the ‘people’s choice’ Myeloma Garden’ is possibly a commitment more from the heart than anything else. I would not have voted for this one as my ‘people’s choice’. Nevertheless it does give publicity to a generally lesser known disease with no real cure; anything to advance the knowledge and research into this awful cancer.
I too loved Saville’s Garden and commented last time that I could really live with this one for very similar reasons that you outline – it seems ‘real’. Then, a few nights ago we were watching ‘Chelsea’ on TV and Monty Don and Joe Swift made some pertinent comments i.e. how it may not be all that safe and easy to maintain – referring to the rocky culvert with the narrow bridge. Try and get a barrow over that without teetering, I did think after they made those comments. It hadn’t entered my mind until then, yes for some people it would be difficult to scramble down and up – my knees wouldn’t like it! They didn’t think it could translate to a home garden easily with those types of features – food for thought.
After seeing the garden created by Marcus Barnett at the Barn Garden Cotswold Mill on Instagram, I realised how well Sarah Price’s garden at Chelsea would go with those Cotswold stone buildings. A very clever design, even though, like you Janna, I thought the colour of the pathways and some of the ‘structures’ look quite odd to my eye — stood out too much. Other than with a Cotwold barn in that typical Cotswold stone, I am not sure how well it would translate to an English garden setting. Maybe it belongs in a semi-arid or even a Mediterranean environment. I do like it a lot but there is still something that niggles. Another thing I noticed is all of a sudden there is a definite ‘push’ on those coloured irises, in the UK at least.. Ah the power of ‘advertising’!
Interesting what you said about the Savills garden. Of course, you are the world’s expert at gardening on the side of cliffs after your last place! It didn’t strike me as being so difficult to garden – I suppose because 95% of the garden was flat, but I take your point. My garden at home is so flat that I probably crave a bit of variety in the terrain! I also agree that Sarah Prices’s garden had a definite Mediterranean feel to it. Certainly felt like it would fit in better in more of an arid location than our ‘green and pleasant’ land here. Especially looking out at my gravel driveway as I type this – full of leaves, fallen cherry blossom and all the associated weeds that then germinate in the accumulated organic matter (not to mention the moss in the shadiest parts!).
As I was not at Chelsea this year I only have your photos to go by, but I would have picked the Myeloma garden as the planting had definition and clumps of colour and leaves that were clearly visible. The Horatio Garden however, I found pale and bitty. Lots of nice plants but so intermingled that nothing really stood out.
I also liked the Savill’s Garden, probably more for the buildings and hard landscaping than the planting.
In my email the Nurture Garden photos seemed to be rather overdeveloped and pale.
I may well have changed these ideas if I had seen the gardens in the flesh. I do like to read your comments though – they make me think.
It’s interesting that you really liked the Myeloma garden. Of course it did have high definition and a lot of contrast of textures in the different leaves and larger flower types. I can see what you mean about Horatio’s being quite bitty. I was told when I was just starting out in horticulture that there were two types of gardeners – those who love plants as individual specimens and those who are more interested in the overall effect of plants put together. Perhaps that’s something that makes one or other of those gardens more appealing? I’m certainly an overall effect person; I think Chris Beardshaw’s garden was maybe more about bringing out the best in each and every species. I also completely agree with you that the buildings and hard landscaping was a major part of the the appeal of the Savills garden. As, I think, is so often the case with great gardens. The planting can be out of this world but without a setting, usually either a view or built elements, I always think there’s something fundamentally missing. And the Nurture garden was very pale – don’t think that was just the photos. Thanks for your comments – they got me thinking too!
Thank you for compiling this blog. I do enjoy viewing & reading. I hope to one day get to Chelsea. I don’t for a moment put myself into the realms of those who know a lot about “what makes a good garden” For me, it’s the naturalistic garden & the one that provides a place for connection & community. So lovely to take some time to spend looking at your beautiful photos.
We do need to get you over here one year Louise, so you can see Chelsea for yourself. I know you would love it! Plus of course a full UK tour of gardens! I think your own garden shows that you know more about what makes a good garden than you think you do. You’ve taken a framework and then developed something so special from that. A personal garden, shaped by and to suit its owner, has a quality that no Chelsea garden can ever offer. Still lovely to get ideas and stimulation from Chelsea though!
I can’t wait for the day to visit Chelsea and do a UK tour of gardens! Hopefully your garden is on that tour as well? Perhaps you could compile a list of gardens for me or better still join me on some. One day soon I do hope. Sending well wishes to you from afar.
It’s so hard to make a valid judgment of a garden based on a few photos. My opinions may be very different if I had vetted Chealsea. However I thought the gardens this year underwhelming and some of the structures seemed somewhat odd.
I don’t understand what the water (?) feature in the Horatio garden was trying to say with the bricks. Were bricks really sitting in water? Were they forming a pattern? I thought it most unattractive.
The Saville garden would get my tick if it came with the kitchen staff but otherwise I don’t like garden kitchens. I put a lot of time and effort into staying away from my own indoor kitchen!
The Price garden was perhaps my favourite. I liked the layout of the paths and garden beds but the planting didn’t excite me and that funny table on the brick legs was not at all appealing.
Beardshaw’s garden was nice but not any more than that.
Perhaps I’m becoming spoilt from looking at too many pretty garden pictures but there wasn’t a single feature that I would like to include in my current or dream garden. I think that might be a first for Chelsea gardens.
There were really different views on whether this was a good Chelsea year or not. My first Chelsea in person was 2016, the year I moved back to the UK, and for me this has not since been beaten. But perhaps that was partly as it was novel. I think 2023 was probably a little heavy on messaging at the expense of translatable garden design. You asked about the bricks in Horatio’s garden – I think they were actually the surface of the water feature ie a built in part, not laid on top. They didn’t offend me, but they did cover a huge flat area in an already high ratio hard-landscaped garden. Of course kitchen gardens are the norm in Australia but there is not much point to them here, where they just accumulate algae most of the year (and those kitchen staff are a little hard to conjure up!). Is there not something to, if you have cook, better that you can at least be outside, if the weather is nice? Maybe you want to separate fun gardening with chore cooking. Glad you agreed on those brick legs in Sarah Price’s garden. I thought I was the only one who didn’t adore every single element in that garden! I do agree that we are somewhat overloaded with ‘perfect’ garden photos these days. I wonder if part of your problem is also that you already have a magical garden you have developed over the decades. Why on earth would you want to import something from Chelsea?